Toby Johnson's
titles are
available in other ebook formats from Smashwords.

Things I Learned from Joseph Campbell

There are three
identifiable themes in the thought of Joseph Campbell and his fans (Joe
would not have liked the word "followers" which perhaps would have been
the appropriate term there!). These are loosely associable with what
Campbell identified as the four functions
of myth: psychological/pedagogical,
social, cosmological, and mystical/metaphysical.

These
themes are: training young people in the nature of mythology,
reclaiming myth as a high cultural art form, and (I think, most
importantly) identifying the so-called "new myth." There is also in the
work of the Joseph Campbell Institute an effort to link like minds in
various sorts of real and virtual roundtable discussions. These then
correlate respectively with the pedagogical, mystical, cosmological,
and social functions.

The
Pedagogical Theme:

While
the content of Campbell's books and talks was always the vast range of
mythological stories and artistic expressions that he loved to
rhapsodize about, the single, central message in all his work was
simply that all religion is myth.

His
joke was that "myth is other people's religion." But the implication of
that, of course, was that one's own religion is also myth to somebody
else. None of it is true in any literal sense. All religion is metaphor
for certain biological and psychological dynamics that determine and
direct human experience. The metaphors of religion are supposed to
assist with the "right" ways to experience one's human life and so to
make the "right" choices about how to live a decent, happy,
contributing life.

This
is a radically different way of understanding religion from the
mainstream Judeo-Christian religion that dominates the U.S. (and, in
particular, the culture of New York City in the middle of the 20th
Century when Campbell was coming of age and then flourishing).
Judeo-Christian religion claims to be historically true, and so not
mythological at all.

For
Campbell's readers and fan, then, one of the central problems of modern
life is how to raise children to understand religion, that is, how to
gain from the moral lessons in the stories and to be properly edified,
but not to fall into unscientific and unreasonable belief in the
religious doctrines in the way the religious institutions would want. A
solution for how to teach children about religion was then developed
which mimicks the experience of the adults in discovering and being
edified by Joseph Campbell's ideas--and those of the whole field of
comparative religions and new-paradigm science. Teach the children all
the myths.

This
results in a sort of valorizing of myth for its own sake: exposure to
the mythological stories of all the various human cultures of the world
will be beneficial. Indeed, this is a theme in Jungian psychoanalysis
(which arena of thought was the basis for the new-paradigm of
religion). For Jung, cultural myths were like the dreams of the
collective unconscious; and in the same way as Freud discovered that
talking about one's psychodynamic processes, including analysis of
dreams, was therapeutic for mental disorders, so Jung thought bringing
mythological themes and associations into consciousness would be
beneficial and healing for the human personality.

It's
not entirely clear how true this might be. Indeed, it is this notion
that is really what the modern "new-age, new-paradigm," philosopher of
religion Ken Wilber calls the "pre/trans fallacy," i.e. confusing the
irrationality of primitive religion with the trans-rational mystical
consciousness of evolved post-modern, post-quantum theory thought. Just
because American Indian languages like Hopi (as discussed by Benjamin
L. Whorf) consist primarily of verbs, it does not follow that the Hopi
elders understood the quantum nature of the cosmos.

The
High Culture Form Theme:

Fans
and followers of Joseph Campbell's--like Campbell himself--like
stories. They like aphorisms like that of Eli Wiesel that "God created
human beings because He loves stories." Campbell liked to tell stories.
His audiences liked to listen to him. And they probably went home and
repeated those stories to other people.

One
theme then in Campbellian thought is that we ought to read and listen
to and analyze the great treasury of mythological storties that come
down to us from around the world because they're great art in
themselves. Religion and creative art are aspects of one another.

In
the same way you go to art museums to appreciate the high culture forms
of past artisans and artists, so you might read the mythological
stories from the past and even participate in the religious practices
of those people who still practice religion (and believe in it as
literal truth--"God's own Truth") but with your own enlightened
perspective.

This
results in even more valorization of myth for its own sake. And further
raises the spectre of the "pre/trans fallacy." Just because you--as a
modern, sophisticated, intelligent person well-read about religion--can
see deep and profound meaning for you in the stories of the past, it
doesn't follow that the prophets and evangelists who composed the
religions knew or intended such profound wisdom.

The
"New Myth" Theme:

One
of the things Joseph Campbell liked to talk about was what would be the
myth of the future, what will be the content of the religious doctrines
in the future?

He
opined that we can no more predict the myth of the future than we can
predict tonight's dream. And in that context, it sounded like he was
talking about the birth of a new religion with a new savior: a new
Jesus (or Maitreya or whatever) who'd rise to prominence with a new
religion to spread.

But
that is NOT really what the new myth is going to be about. And Joe knew
that perfectly well.

Way
back in the 1970s, when Joe was starting to achieve prominence with the
West Coast counterculture, this current writer was on the crew that
regularly hosted and put on (and ushered, cooked, cleaned, stuffed
envelopes, put up posters, etc.) his Northern California appearances. I
met Joe originally at the Mann Ranch in 1971. I was fresh out of
Catholic religious life, studying Comparative Religions--especially
"hippie" neo-Buddhism--at the California Institute of Asian Studies
(which later changed its name to Integral Studies). I was fascinated
with Campbell's ideas because of the implication they had for my own
religious belief: it meant my Catholicism was a myth like all the
others and that "Truth" transcends all the various traditions.

I
told him that in a conversation over dinner that first time I met him.
I told him I thought his vision of religion as myth and metaphor was in
fact the insight that would found a new paradigm spiritual
consciousness. In my own rhapsodizing, I guess, I told him I thought
his ideas were the "new myth." Joe was gratified to have
fans--especially bright-eyed young men. I think because he didn't have
sons of his own and he taught at a girls' college, his young male fans
represented something like his legacy. BUT he didn't want to be seen as
a guru of any sort. That is something he did not like among the hippies
and counterculturalists who were drawn to his lectures. He was an
academician and a scholar, not a spiritual teacher or guru. He didn't
want to be anybody's priest or psychological guide.

And
so he always deflected my enthusiastic rantings during the question and
answer parts of his talks when I'd get up and proclaim the meta-myth of
myth--i.e. understanding the nature of religion as myth and
understanding one's own understanding as yet an example of more
mythological thinking.

But
this is THE important idea in Campbell. He referred to the evolution of
myth in the conclusion to The Hero with A Thousand Faces:

The descent of the Occidental sciences from
the heavens
to the earth
(from seventeenth-century astronomy to nineteenth-century biology), and
their concentration today, at last, on man himself (in
twentieth-century anthropology and psychology), mark the path of a
prodigious transfer of the focal point of human wonder. Not the animal
world, not the plant world, not the miracle of the spheres, but man
himself is now the crucial mystery. (Hero, p. 391)

That
prodigious
transfer has continued on into the
twenty-first century now with brain study, DNA research, bio-feedback
studies of meditators, and complex theories of consciousness
(including, of course, the role of consciousness in determining the
outcome of scientific experimentation). Ken Wilber's work, by the way,
is another example of this shift in the human experience toward greater
and greater reflexivity and self-consciousness. To paraphase the last
sentence in the quote from the Hero: Not the supernatural world of the
gods of old, but consciousness itself in now the powerful image of the
essence of existence. Not an external personality watching over the
earth, but the spark of consciousness itself is the appropriate image
for God today. God isn't "out-there"; God is "in here," in the sense
that our own awareness of our being aware and creating images for
ourselves of what our experience is is the thing that inspires us to
feel wonder and to sense a place within the cosmos.

In the terms Wilber used to identify the fallacy of
over-valorizing mythic consciousness of the past, we might say today's
"enlightened" consciousness is able to look back at the history of
religion with modern, scientific rationality and see simply "they can't
all be true" and that the wisdom of religion lies in the meaning of the
stories, not the content. So rationality sees beyond the non-rational,
pre-rational thinking of mythological consciousness. AND it finds the
self-reflection (made possible by our historical, anthropological,
global perspective) reveals consciousness is even bigger than we can
grasp. That "bigger," elusive, inarticulable quality of consciousness
is what's called trans-rational.

Wilber isn't exactly attacking Campbell and the
Campbellians with his "pre/trans fallacy" as adding a layer to the
self-reflection that is part of mythological sophistication. He's
giving
us the reminder that even when we've figured out what myth is, we're
still dealilng with a mythical construction of our own minds.

I'm not sure Wilber necessarily understands that. But THAT
is certainly what we ought to get from Wilber's critique of Campbell's
ideas.

That "transrational" (but not at all irrational)
realization represents a future evolution of the mind in understanding
its own workings.

Campbell and the Fallacy of Over-Valorization of Myth

Ken
Wilber's ideas challenge the valorization of the myths of old--with
their irrational "magical" thinking--objecting that not all the myths
are of equal value or equal wisdom. Just because an idea comes out of
religious enthusiasm does not make it a good or benefical idea.

I
think that is something Joe Campbell would have agreed with. Though his
style was to say all religions are false in being descriptions of
material reality, but all are also true as being descriptions of
psychological realities.

Joe
clearly preferred Buddhism to Christianity, but not because the Buddha
was a better teacher or did better miracles, but because Buddhism had
long ago developed the outside stance on religion and had already
refocused onto the nature of consciousness (instead of the personality
of God).

One
of the ways Joe demonstrated his preferences for Buddhistic thinking
over Judeo-Christian thinking is, I fear, one of the things that
besmirched his public image just after his death. Joe used to do
imitations of accents. His educated-class New Yorker identity showed
itself in his making fun of old Jewish ladies and Irish Catholic
priests and nuns. This got characterized by critics of Joe's as bigotry
and anti-Semitism. I tend to think it was more than he was good at
doing those impersonations--and not so good, for instance, at
doing a
Japanese accent.

At
any rate, myths have many levels of power. Part of the function of a
myth is to alter consciousness. Myths are like spiritual practices.
Believing in a specific myth changes how one sees their world, and can
actually produce changes in consciousness itself, i.e., belief can
produce mystical experience.

Myth
conveys meaning and wisdom. But not all the effects of myths are
positive or evolutionarily productive.

The
story of Jesus on the cross is a beautiful myth about enlightened
spiritual consciousness embracing all life, even the suffering and
death that can prove to be part of it--even when that suffering is
caused by other human beings.

The
story of the Passion of Jesus conveys wisdom about loving life. That is
its message of mystical--and cognitive--transformation.

But
the story also has justified and inspired countless generations of
Christians to believe God delights in human suffering. The followers of
Jesus who should have seen from his death that the first commandment
should be "no torture," instead went into the torture business in
Jesus's name just as soon as they had achieve the power and the
ownership of the torture chambers.

Christianity
with its message of Jesus as the only begotten son of God ended
up becoming belligerent and genocidal out of what supposed to be a sign
of God's generosity. As the "only" true religion, Christianity could
spread itself by violence.

In
the end, the meaning that we should derive from the myths is always
much less the content of the myths themselves and more the hint at the
elusive nature of consciousness itself.

I.e.,
the reason for looking at the myths of old is to experience wonder: to
see hints at wisdom for how to live a good life, to see hints at how
big consciousness is. This experience founds the "new myth" of
consciousness itself and the meta-myth of religion as the universe
giving itself clues about the nature and shape of psychological reality.

Toby Johnson, PhDis
author of nine books: three non-fiction books that apply the wisdom of
his
teacher and "wise old man," Joseph Campbell to modern-day social and
religious problems, four gay genre novels that dramatize spiritual
issues at the heart of gay identity, and two books on gay men's
spiritualities and the mystical experience of homosexuality and editor
of a collection of "myths" of gay men's consciousness.

Johnson's book
GAY
SPIRITUALITY: The Role of Gay Identity in the Transformation of
Human Consciousness won a Lambda Literary Award in 2000.

His GAY
PERSPECTIVE: Things Our [Homo]sexuality Tells Us about the Nature
of God and the Universe was nominated for a Lammy in 2003. They
remain
in
print.

FINDING
YOUR OWN TRUE MYTH: What I Learned from Joseph Campbell: The Myth
of the Great Secret III tells the story of Johnson's learning the
real nature of religion and myth and discovering the spiritual
qualities of gay male consciousness.